Messages

It's probably seeds from stuff like poverty grass. The little dot they send off to spread apparently counts as a projectile.

Is it possible to get an OSO to generate stone debris? I like the map but something seems to break that doesn't let the stone debris spawn and I haven't been able to figure it out on my own.

Right now? Not much... you just have to try and make the environment as pleasant as possible with carpet and smooth stone as well as getting someone to clean up the rubble. Presently about the only positive modifier for happiness is socializing, there's "pleasant environment" but I haven't figured out exactly what makes that.

Thanks again! I was also sifting through the code, I can't modify it, but I also don't know how much I can actually say. There's something under happiness that's "base" happiness, I wonder if you could change that and achieve a similar effect to adding +50 to nutrient paste.

Here you go:  Nutrient Paste gives +50 Happiness Mod

Thank you! And now might I request this+turrets don't explode? I don't know why I didn't think of that sooner haha

Or just make eating food give +50 happiness, I know eating makes me happy. though nutrient paste doesn't sound delicious, like I said we have no other option! And thank you in advanced as well. You can do it whatever way is easier, one massive bonus or working away all the negatives (I imagine it would be the first one)

Is it possible to remove/change certain happiness/fear factors? Like the colonists still take a hit for eating nutrient paste but we don't have anything else to feed them at the moment, seems kind of unfair lol

Well that has something to do with balance, one way or another. Either turrets need to be stronger to warrant the response or the response needs to be toned down and yeah there seems to be some conflict over the exact right answer. Such things happen when people form opinions. No matter how strong or weak the turrets are I feel the raiders and storytellers need to use other cues for determining strength. I suggested before with seeing how quickly/slowly they are taken care of and how much damage they deal before routing to see how powerful the next wave is. This would take into account things like game changing events, like solar flares, colonists ability (or lack thereof) to use weapons, and player skill in handling the situation. Of course I have no idea if such a thing is even possible but it seems like a very fair system to go by.

See, now, that's why I hate when people don't read my previous posts >.< That's not YOUR side. That's OUR side. I have nothing against turrets, I have everything against turrets as a god-hand mechanic. See, it's simply this mish-mash of terms like turret-problem actually describing problem that turrets are just a part of, and not it's core? Ugly. So I argue that turrets as they are now need to go, you argue that turrets in general don't need to go, actually we agree, just we don't know it.

(but then again, just to be fair, there was so much text-walling done on this topic, I can't blame ya you missed the point. Or I did. Darn, I would probably miss my own point reading it all again. Happens all the time)

Nothing against turrets that help you but don't win the game for you. All the way!

Ah well see I thought you kinda had it in for turrets, wanted them gone forever not just as they are now but whatever the case I'm glad we came to a peaceful conclusion. We shouldn't debate the matter any further until we see what Tynan can come up with.

Wow, this conversation got away from the OP quick

I think it maintained discussion about turrets and the balance of turrets. Oddly enough I think we're still divided on turret use because several of us have said they're useless while others claim they need to go away. I guess it just depends on what strategies you actually use because I'd agree with the original message of the game responding wayyyy too heavily to turrets because 1 turret can mean 3+ extra bad guys which a turret is definitely not worth. I've put them in darkness, behind sandbags, and abused the waffle mechanic and 4 turrets is no where near powerful enough to kill 12+ raiders, even with colonists helping from the side.

See this is what I think we on the turret side were trying to convey, we don't want an instant win button either, we just want a legitimate strategy revolving around turrets that takes time and effort to accomplish that will keep our precious colonists a bit more out of harms way, which stops them from seeing a lot of dead bodies a fairly bad happiness reducer. Of course there's bound to be "malfunctions" that cause trouble and stuff. I can't convey all my ideas here but I hope it can be realized that such strategies can be just as rewarding and interactive if done right.

And then comes the part where I don't understand the problem of the "don't like it, don't use it" mentality. It happens EVERYWHERE. Tons of games with people declaring this or that is bad or making artificial difficulty for themselves. And even in this game people do that. Can't make a mountain home, can't use steam power, can't use hydroponics. This game, and many others, are what the gamer CHOOSES to make of it and more options are better than none. Only the most truly game breaking of options should be eliminated. People are notoriously good at making their own fun so just give them the tools and don't tell them how to play just let them figure it out on their own.

*edit*
And as for them never figuring out another way to play because of the existence of tools I'd call you a fool. They will either be completely happy with what they have or they will seek out ways to make it better. I suppose I can't speak for everyone but before tossing a game away completely I look to see if I can change what's bugging me or if I'm missing something.

*edit2*
By truly game breaking I would include things like waffles and placing demo charges in front of a door. Though having a narrow corridor to walk down lined with explosives isn't exactly an illegitimate strategy nor would be having a turret kill zone, these are things people would do (and fall for) in real life and while no one wants a completely real game such things seem reasonable enough to me *shrug*

I suppose the solution to that, DarkThug, is to disable the dispenser in the prison area if you've decided they don't get any and there is one.

Is it possible to lock in just happiness? I keep them happy just fine usually but sometimes it seems they just end up seeing too many dead bodies after a harsh wave and the fear doesn't counter act the lose of happiness enough. And while I suppose it's reasonable that a miner wouldn't want to go into a dark hole just after fighting a bunch of raiders but I just want to tell him to suck it up

I suppose in the end it's impossible to keep all sides of an argument happy. This is why modding is important to the life of a game, it can make everyone happy by changing the things they disagree with. Doesn't need to happen now and I don't know if he has said anything definite but I hope Tynan does support modding.

For the sake of arguing though I don't see why it shouldn't be possible to have fully automated defenses. It shouldn't be easy, metal cost could be exorbitant, could require more regular maintenance outside of the deterioration we have now, perhaps require extensive research, or (and I rather like this one) some blueprints to be found. Last one even adds in some randomization, everyone likes Randy right?... Right?

There should be many ways to play the game and playing with turrets should be one of them. Playing with just colonists should be just as possible. The choice really depends on the gamer and perhaps a touch of luck. Which is why raiders shouldn't be balanced around the existence of things to kill them but rather the other way around. One possible solution I've come up with is checking how fast the raiders get killed once engaged in combat, if it takes ages and there's lots of structural damage then obviously the next one shouldn't be that much more difficult. Alternately if they get wiped out instantly with almost no damage to the player the next set could be significantly harder. I'm sure there's flaws, I haven't put THAT much thought into it, but it's something that could accommodate both styles and player skill as well.

In a game of survival you are going to do what you have to to live. Which means finding the most defensible spot and funneling any bad guys as much as possible through one spot, even in a real situation you'd want to do something similar. I mean would you rather fight these things yourself or build something that can do it for you? I think turrets should probably be a research, not something you have immediately, but it's certainly not something that should be gotten rid of completely and it should be able to be improved so it doesn't become obsolete. Also Raid strength shouldn't be based on the number of turrets, or any construction that helps against raids, because it's kind of self defeating. These things should be built to make raids easier not harder.

Of course I don't expect anything now but I do hope defensive strategies, particularly automated ones, are not made completely invalid by the time the game IS done and that those who like imposing restrictions upon themselves respect the play styles of those that don't.